Tuesday, September 18, 2007
(3:05 PM) | Adam Kotsko:
I'm now mainstream
Yglesias agrees with me that Iran getting nuclear weapons would not actually be a big problem.People never seem to learn that once you "admit" (which you "have to") that we can't tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran, the debate is already over -- talking about whether we should use "diplomacy" or the "military option" is a total waste of time, given the actual existing executive branch. It's just like when everyone "had to admit" that Saddam had WMDs and it was such a horrible thing, so that the liberals were all stuck in the structurally weaker position of prefering diplomacy but "having to admit" that diplomacy wouldn't work without a credible threat of force.
(By the way, does anyone else notice that this aspect of the Iraq war vote has completely disappeared from liberal public discourse now that we're again talking about "diplomacy" vs. "force" in relation to the "threat" of Iran? Back in the day, talking about how the vote to authorize war was really a vote for putting the pressure on Saddam diplomacy-wise was considered a pretty good defense. Now that the same thing is happening again, all the mainstream Democratic politicians are once again refusing to take concrete action to constrain Bush's military options on Iran. Presumably if war with Iran happens, in four years we'll all be hailing as potential saviors the very people who failed to stop the fucking thing before it started -- then acting super-surprised when they don't do "what we elected them to do." It's the same fucking thing -- it could really be happening again. And even if the Democrats are better insofar as they wouldn't have actively started the war of their own volition, they're likely to be pretty useless when it comes to either preventing or stopping whatever war Bush decides to launch. I have no idea what "we" can do about this situation.)
The only reasonable thing to do is to refuse to buy into the idiotic, paranoid frame that somehow the most powerful nation in world history is going to be "threatened" by some lame-ass Third World dictatorship. Being afraid of such losers is just pathetic, especially given that we held up pretty well under a genuine existential threat (i.e., the USSR) within living memory. If liberals actually want to look strong, they should refuse to be intimidated by people like Saddam and Cheney -- but of course, taking a stand like that would require actually stepping outside of the framework created by the right wing, which is apparently completely impossible.
